Pako Posted October 29, 2004 Author Share Posted October 29, 2004 ---------------- On 10/28/2004 11:34:37 PM skonopa wrote: ---------------- On 10/28/2004 7:36:52 PM Pako wrote: I do have a local B&K dealer in town..... I may have to check into that... ~Cheers~ ---------------- I would highly suggest that, as I've been extremely happy with my B&K Ref 200.7 amp. Good luck in your search for an amp and let us know what you end up with. ---------------- Steven, I didn't even notice your current system. Denon 3802 + B&K 200.7. That would be the closest to what kind of upgrade I would be considering. At twice the <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Watts per channel, I'm sure you have noticed a huge difference. Does the Denon seem to be an adequate processor? By chance, have you tried a B&K Reference series Preamp to compare against the Denon?<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skonopa Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 ---------------- On 10/29/2004 11:40:52 AM Pako wrote: Steven, I didn't even notice your current system. Denon 3802 + B&K 200.7. That would be the closest to what kind of upgrade I would be considering. At twice the <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Watts per channel, I'm sure you have noticed a huge difference. Does the Denon seem to be an adequate processor? By chance, have you tried a B&K Reference series Preamp to compare against the Denon?<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> ---------------- I've notice quite a difference when I went to the B&K amp insted of using the amps that came in the Denon reciever. The clarity and detail, as well as the dynamics were just incredible with the B&K amp. Also, the bass seemed to have much more punch and authority, as well as staying very clean and clear. However, I found that the pre/pro section of the Denon really does seem to work very nicely. However, I've not had a chance to A/B it against a dedicated pre/pro, such as the B&K Ref 50. However, at the local dealer, I did listen to the B&K Ref 50 with Ref 200.5 amp on a set of Martin-Logan speakers. It did sound very nice, but I found that I liked my own setup better, as the Klipsch just had better clarity and dynamics than the Martin-Logans. I especially could tell in the percussion sections. The drums just seem to stand out much more, as like they were right in my room, on my system than they did (listening to the same track) on the Martin-Logan system that I auditioned. I say, get the amp, and fly with the Denon as a pre/pro for the time being. It will work nicely and still provide an excellent sound for your system. You will still notice a great improvement with the amp alone. Eventually, when you are ready, look into a dedicated pre/pro. For me, I am more likely to get a new TV before getting a new pre/pro. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pako Posted October 29, 2004 Author Share Posted October 29, 2004 ---------------- On 10/29/2004 12:27:14 PM skonopa wrote: ---------------- On 10/29/2004 11:40:52 AM Pako wrote: Steven, I didn't even notice your current system. Denon 3802 + B&K 200.7. That would be the closest to what kind of upgrade I would be considering. At twice the <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = ""urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"" />Watts per channel, I'm sure you have noticed a huge difference. Does the Denon seem to be an adequate processor? By chance, have you tried a B&K Reference series Preamp to compare against the Denon?<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = ""urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"" /> ---------------- I've notice quite a difference when I went to the B&K amp insted of using the amps that came in the Denon reciever. The clarity and detail, as well as the dynamics were just incredible with the B&K amp. Also, the bass seemed to have much more punch and authority, as well as staying very clean and clear. However, I found that the pre/pro section of the Denon really does seem to work very nicely. However, I've not had a chance to A/B it against a dedicated pre/pro, such as the B&K Ref 50. However, at the local dealer, I did listen to the B&K Ref 50 with Ref 200.5 amp on a set of Martin-Logan speakers. It did sound very nice, but I found that I liked my own setup better, as the Klipsch just had better clarity and dynamics than the Martin-Logans. I especially could tell in the percussion sections. The drums just seem to stand out much more, as like they were right in my room, on my system than they did (listening to the same track) on the Martin-Logan system that I auditioned. I say, get the amp, and fly with the Denon as a pre/pro for the time being. It will work nicely and still provide an excellent sound for your system. You will still notice a great improvement with the amp alone. Eventually, when you are ready, look into a dedicated pre/pro. For me, I am more likely to get a new TV before getting a new pre/pro. ---------------- Thanks for the great advise! Makes perfect sence to me.... -Cheers- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psg Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 At twice the Watts per channel, I'm sure you have noticed a huge difference. Note that's not a huge difference. It's 3 dB. I'm sure if there's a huge difference it's in sound quality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pako Posted October 29, 2004 Author Share Posted October 29, 2004 ---------------- On 10/29/2004 12:34:50 PM psg wrote: At twice the Watts per channel, I'm sure you have noticed a huge difference. Note that's not a huge difference. It's 3 dB. I'm sure if there's a huge difference it's in sound quality. ---------------- I agree, not a huge 'loudness' improvement. It's amazing how much information can be found in that additional 3db. ;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skonopa Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 ---------------- On 10/29/2004 12:34:50 PM psg wrote: ---------------- At twice the Watts per channel, I'm sure you have noticed a huge difference. ---------------- Note that's not a huge difference. It's 3 dB. I'm sure if there's a huge difference it's in sound quality. ---------------- Yes, it was in the sound quality. I could tell immediatly upon playing that first CD after installing the B&K amp into my system. After nearly a year having it, I am still in awe at just how friggan clear and detailed this setup is! I still get giddy everytime I play something on it. It can get plenty loud, even with the Denon, but with the more powerful B&K, I found I got much better clarity, detail, as well as much better dynamics. The bass has to be heard to be believed. I could not believe how accurate and clean the bass was, not to mention it delivered a very nice punch. The REL Storm III subwoofer I have in the system only enchanced it that much more. This is probaly one reason I have not really did anything to my system in the past year, as I am very happy with it as it stands, at least on the audio side. Oh, I am certain improvements could be made, but at what cost? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybertec Posted November 1, 2004 Share Posted November 1, 2004 I just received my Outlaw 770 Power Amp, and I am in Sonic Bliss, before the Outlaw I was using just a Denon 3805 Receiver, which was great, but once I hooked up this Outlaw Monster, we are talking a different ballgame here, all I can say is, OMG, this beast is nothing but sonic bliss to my ears, it cleared up every music and movie sound track, everything sounds awsome with prestine fidelity, with very tight bass, I suggest if you are looking at a Power Amp that is not going to break your bank account, try the Outlaw, they have a 30 day no questions asked return policy, I purchased the 770 as a B-Stock item from them and saved $300, the unit came like new with no scraches or marks on it, and like I stated earlier, I am in sonic bliss, take care. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griffinator Posted November 2, 2004 Share Posted November 2, 2004 ---------------- On 10/29/2004 12:34:50 PM psg wrote: Note that's not a huge difference. It's 3 dB. I'm sure if there's a huge difference it's in sound quality. ---------------- It's all about headroom. 3dB of extra headroom, particularly in an HT system, can make a whole world of difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minn_male42 Posted November 2, 2004 Share Posted November 2, 2004 ---------------- On 10/26/2004 3:59:07 PM Pako wrote: Let me first qualify that I have searched this forum for possible answers with little luck. What I'm wondering is, would the extra dollars spent on separate amps for my 7 channels make that much of a difference in sound QUALITY? Current Audio setup: Audio: Speakers - Klipsch RF-35 Mains, RC-3 II Center, RS-3 II x2 Side Surrounds, RS-3 x2 Rear Surrounds. <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 /> Rockford 12" Punch Subs x2 in DIY end table cabs. Equipment - Denon AVR-3805 Receiver/Amp, Nikko NA-790 to power subs. I will continue using the Denon-3805 as the preamp. To justify the expense, the increase in SQ would have to pretty extreme. Without having infinite funds, I can't just "try" out different combinations. Also, living in Northwest Montana , the pro-audio selection to demo from is pathetic to say the least. Any advise would be greatly appreciated. <?xml:namespace prefix = o /> ---------------- many people have gotten great results by doing just that...... even if you just add a two channel amp to power your mains, you will hear an improvement.... i use KLF-30's for my mains and when i added a carver pro ZR1000 amp, the sound improved greatly compared to the internal amps on my pioneer elite 55txi..... i plan to get additional carver amps as funds permit for the rest of the channels.... cybertec, how is your new furman unit working out for you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdsang Posted November 2, 2004 Share Posted November 2, 2004 Just to let you all know, someone told me that the Parasound stuff is actually under rated. The A23 has been tested at 170 watts per channel and the A51 is rated at over 300 each. Just what I heard, not sure if its true. CD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybertec Posted November 2, 2004 Share Posted November 2, 2004 minn_male, the Furman unit worked out great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.